I am aware of their experience in these matters on the subjects before the subcommittee this morning.

Thank you very much.

Senator CRANSTON. Thank you very much. I too am delighted to join in welcoming Lloyd Bentsen, a very good friend and able Senator from Texas, who has shown great interest in this field and has introduced one of the bills before us, S. 3381, which is identical to the House-passed bill, H.R. 14225.

Senator Bentsen has been a very good friend of the handicapped people who need the assistance of programs like those we are considering this morning.

I am delighted you are with us.

STATEMENT OF HON. LLOYD BENTSEN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Senator BENTSEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I know it is a busy schedule that all of us have at this particular time of the session.

Therefore, I am most appreciative of the time you have taken for this very important piece of legislation. I know your long support, Senator Cranston, in trying to work to resolve some of the problems of the handicapped in this country.

Senator Stafford certainly has been a leader in that work as has Senator Tunney.

I want to pay tribute to this committee for the work it has done and for its distinguished chairman's work on it, Senator Randolph, for his untiring efforts to improve the lives of disabled Americans.

Today you are considering a number of different measures on vocational rehabilitation, including my own bill, S. 3381, and the bill introduced by the distinguished Senator from Vermont, Mr. Stafford, S. 3108.

I do not appear today to argue the virtues of my bill as against the others, but to commend the committee for its early action and to urge that legislation be enacted as expeditiously as possible.

Briefly, the Bentsen bill has two provisions which I believe merit the subcommittee's attention.

First, it extends the Vocational Rehabilitation Act for an additional year through fiscal 1976, and second, it provides for the transfer of the Rehabilitation Services Administration from the Social and Rehabilitation Service to the Office of the Secretary of HEW.

I have long been concerned that the States do not have adequate notice of Federal funding in the fields of education, health, and aid to the handicapped.

Too often the States receive Federal funds late in the fiscal year, which disrupts their planning and causes them to spend inefficiently. Last year, for example, because of vetoes and delays in final approval of the legislation, it was August before the States knew what to expect in rehabilitation funds. That was not the fault of this committee or of the Congress, but because unfortunately the administration chose to make rehabilitation a testing ground for the executive

branch's ability to frustrate legislation which is not shaped according to its standards.

I believe that we should guard against efforts to make this legislation a political football, for in the end, it is the people least able to afford delay who become the victims of political infighting. I trust that this will not happen again this year.

The additional year's authorization contained in my bill is advisable, I believe, because of the special nature of the rehabilitation program.

As the members know, the dollar figures contained in the authorizing legislation for this program constitute, for the basic State program, an entitlement of funds for each of the States.

What this unique linkage means is simply this: the law requires the Federal Government to give each State, by formula, a basic grant for rehabilitation services if the State appropriates the necessary matching funds.

The linkage between authorization and entitlements provides a great incentive for the States to appropriate the necessary matching funds. Because the State must know ahead of time what the authorizations are to be, if they are to be able to appropriate the matching funds, I believe it is feasible and wise to extend the program for an additional

year.

Many of the legislatures which must appropriate these funds are currently in session, and we should give them sufficient advance notice so that there can be readily available and sufficient matching funds for an orderly and timely administration of the program at the State and local levels.

My understanding is that this subcommittee may well consider such a provision in its later deliberations, and I want to express my support for that effort.

The second part of my bill transfers the rehabilitation program from the Social and Rehabilitation Service to the Office of the Secretary of HEW. A similar provision is included in Senator Stafford's bill, except that in that bill the program would be transferred to the Office of Human Development within HEW.

The nature of the transfer is less significant to me than the fact that the program no longer belongs in SRS. There are several reasons why I must conclude that this is so: (1) the rehabilitation program was created to help disabled individuals develop new talents so that they can again participate in our society to their fullest potential.

Clearly, then, a more appropriate home is needed for the program than the Social and Rehabilitation Service, which is composed primarily of welfare programs; (2) there is evidence to suggest that SRS officials are less than enthusiastic about following the intent of Congress on this program.

Although the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was signed into law last September, proposed regulations were published only 3 weeks ago. In addition, administrative and bureaucratic efforts in SRS have clouded the program's management.

Too often, we have found that the people in charge of rehabilitation programs are not deeply grounded in rehabilitation experience; the new director, for example, is formerly of the Veterans' Administration.

With administration efforts to defeat previous rehabilitation bills and some evidence which surfaced in the House hearings that SRS officials would prefer to ignore the traditional and identifiable State rehabilitation agencies, I believe it is both philosophically and practically necessary to change the location of the rehabilitation program. As I have indicated, I have no particular quarrel with the approach favored in S. 3108.

Mr. Chairman, this traditional Federal-State partnership has been one of the outstanding examples of Federal-State cooperation since its inception 53 years ago.

Since that time, more than 3 million handicapped persons have been rehabilitated.

My own State of Texas, which has a highly successful program, has doubled its rehabilitants in the last 4 years. Last year, the payroll of these individuals jumped from $15 million to $95 million, a remarkable accomplishment for a single year.

This is a program that works. It is not merely a matter of cold figures. It pays off in human terms.

To a paralyzed structural engineer in Washington, D.C., funds from this program have meant a chance to go back to work, supervising the steel construction of churches, apartments, and schools.

To a former mental patient, it has meant productive work as a compressor operator.

To a deaf printer in Iowa, it has meant a job in the composing room of a major newspaper.

And to a businessman paralyzed by polio, it has meant a chance to open his own business in Minnesota, hiring handicapped workers. No Federal program can point to a prouder record of accomplishment.

Once again, let me commend this subcommittee and its distinguished chairman for the attention they have given the program in the past, and let me express my gratitude for these hearings which are an indication that Congress intends to see that it is adequately funded and administered consistent with the best interest of our handicapped citizens.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for letting me intrude at this hour. I know you have quite a number of other witnesses.

Senator CRANSTON. Thank you very much for a very fine statement. I would like to ask you one question in a related piece of legislation. Senator Tunney, who was here a moment ago, and I have introduced an amendment to the mass transit bill providing a program to aid in the development of transit systems or the adaptation of transit systems that will be more readily accessible in a convenient way to handicapped people than is presently the case in almost all transportation systems in the United States.

I understand that you head the subcommittee before which that legislation may be considered. I wonder if you would look at that amendment and give us a hand on it?

Senator BENTSEN. I will be delighted to look at it.

As you know, in the mass transit systems that we have funded recently, particularly Metro here in Washington, we have gone to substantial lengths to try to see that that system was made available to the handicapped.

I will be glad to look into your amendment and that of Senator Tunney's.

Thank you very much.

Senator CRANSTON, Bob.

Senator STAFFORD. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I have no questions. I also want to express appreciation to Senator Bentsen for not only the legislation introduced, but appearing here this morning and giving us the benefit of his advice. I think I can say that when this subcommittee gets through, some of the Senator's suggestions embodied in his bill probably will appear in the clean bill that comes out of the committee. Senator BENTSEN. Thank you very much.

Senator CRANSTON. Our next witness is Frank C. Carlucci, Under Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, accompanied by Mr. James Dwight, Administrator of Social and Rehabilitation Service; Mr. Stanley Thomas, Assistant Secretary for Human Development; and Dr. Andrew Adams, Commissioner of Rehabilitation Services Administration.

Before you proceed, I would like to say I genuinely feel we have had some very fine cooperation from the Department, as I expressed earlier. For that I am very grateful. I want to express concern, however, over the fact that once again we did not have your testimony in advance, in compliance with committee rules.

The Department was advised in early June that we were planning this hearing, so it would seem there was plenty of time to get the testimony to us so that it could be examined prior to your actual appearance and provide us a far better opportunity to ask questions that would be probing and the sort that are in keeping with our responsibilities and the democratic process.

A year ago, we canceled a hearing when this same thing happened, and we were tempted to do so this morning when the testimony was received less than a half hour before the hearing began.

We will not do that, but I intend to do so henceforth if testimony is not given to us in time for us to be fully prepared for the hearings. I would like to request that you consult with Secretary Weinberger and take whatever steps are necessary so that henceforth we will receive the testimony in accordance with the committee rules. If it is necessary to obtain some sort of more formal understanding with OMB, if that is the problem in regard to getting clearance of your testimony before you come up here, I wish you would take those steps. In view of the fact that we have not been able to prepare ourselves appropriately, we will simply hear your testimony, submit written. questions rather than ask them verbally-and request that you get the answers back to us within 3 days, so that we will not be held up.

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK C. CARLUCCI, UNDER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE; ACCOMPANIED BY JAMES DWIGHT, ADMINISTRATOR OF SOCIAL AND REHABILITATION SERVICE; STANLEY THOMAS, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT; DR. ANDREW ADAMS, COMMISSIONER OF REHABILITATION SERVICES ADMINISTRATION; AND MARTIN GERRY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, THE OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS

Mr. CARLUCCI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I apologize for the lateness of the testimony. There was an issue. still pending last night, which I was unavailable to solve, so I accept responsibility for the delay. We will take appropriate steps to see that it does not happen again.

Senator CRANSTON. I appreciate that. If you could have the Secretary write us a letter in regard to this policy, I would appreciate it. Mr. CARLUCCI. I will.

Senator CRANSTON. Thank you, very much.

[The following material was subsequently supplied:]